Asylum-seekers / Refugees

This paper considers the relationship between two human rights discourses, refugee/asylum protection and the body of law that regulates deportations. It suggests that the development of rights against removal, as well as rights during and after removal, aids our understanding of the refugee protection regime and its future. This paper argues that emerging anti-deportation discourses should be systematically studied by those interested in the global refugee regime for three basic reasons: 1) the linkage between the two phenomena of refugee/asylum protection and deportation; 2) deportation human rights discourses embody framing models that might aid reform of the existing refugee protection regime; and 3) deportation discourses offer important rights protections that could strengthen the refugee and asylum regime. It concludes with consideration of how deportation discourses may strengthen protections for refugees, while also helping to develop more capacious and protective systems in the future.

CMSOnAir features an interview with Ron Nixon, a Washington correspondent for the New York Times who covers homeland security issues, including immigration, border and aviation security; cyber security and cyber crime, counterterrorism and violent extremism.

Heightened focus on the “illegal immigrant” suggests that persons without status constitute a new phenomenon, but the issue of authorization to enter and remain in the United States stretches back to the end of the nineteenth century. One agency working with Ellis Island-era immigrants in danger of deportation was the Saint Raphael Society for the Protection of Italian Immigrants. This post examines some of the Society’s records, which includes stories and photographs of persons in danger of deportation.[1]

Proposals to shape migration management policies recognize the need to involve a range of actors to implement humane and effective strategies. However, when observed through the lens of immigration detention, some migration policy trends raise challenging questions, particularly related to the involvement of non-state actors in migration control. This article critically assesses a range of new actors who have become involved in the deprivation of liberty of migrants and asylum seekers, describes the various forces that appear to be driving their engagement in immigration enforcement, and makes a series of recommendations concerning the role of non-state actors and detention in global efforts to manage international migration. These recommendations include ending the use the detention in international migration management schemes; limiting the involvement of private companies in immigration control measures; insisting that the International Organization for Migration (IOM) actively endorse the centrality of human rights in the Global Compact for Migration and amend its constitution so that it makes a clear commitment to international human rights standards; and encouraging nongovernmental organizations to carefully assess the services they provide when operating in detention situations to ensure that their work contributes to harm reduction.

The Center for Migration Studies (CMS) hosted a special conversation with Juan P. Osuna, former Director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) at the US Department of Justice (DOJ), where he oversaw the agency that houses the US immigration court system. Prior to joining EOIR, Professor Osuna was an Associate Deputy Attorney General at DOJ where he oversaw immigration policy.

The expansion of detention, border enforcement, expedited removal, and other practices seek to prevent, deter and interfere with the right of migrants to seek political asylum. These practices exacerbate challenges related to a shortage of legal representation for asylum seekers. This panel addressed efforts to promote and expand access to the US political asylum system in the face of these challenges. It also discussed challenges to the US refugee resettlement program in Texas.

This panel covered the defense of persons in detention and in removal proceedings. Panelists discussed how organized communities can assert and defend their rights, how to establish coordinated removal defense projects, and whole-of-community responses to the threat of removal.

Meredith Oyen of the University of Maryland reviews Elusive Refuge: Chinese Migrants in the Cold War, by Laura Madokoro. Professor Madokoro recovers the history of China’s twentieth-century refugees. Focusing on humanitarian efforts to find new homes for Chinese displaced by civil strife, she points...

This panel discussed the formation and work of the Houston Immigration Legal Services Collaborative. It discussed Houston’s “whole of community” approach to immigration services, how the community has organized to defend the rights of immigrants, and the engagement and mobilization of a diverse group of stakeholders, including legal services providers, the funding community, the City of Houston immigrant advocates, and social services organizations.

CMS is a member of the Scalabrini International Migration Network (SIMN), a global network of 270+ entities that provide services to migrants, including shelters and welcoming centers in receiving communities.